Your link didn't go as far as to research what these ' poles ' look like in psychopaths, but I will try and keep up with developments...

When I saw your title, I actually had the tongue-in-cheek thought that maybe they had located the Conscience in orbit, or on some rural commune...
definitely not in a corporate headquarters or government building.

Hope science can one day ( perhaps using stem-cells ) rebuild damaged and missing units...

Read the article again. This brain organ is responsible for considering the value of the conditional 'counterfactual', what probably could have
happened had one's actions been different.

We already knew (he says, hastily consulting his copy of Popular Science for Dimwits) that the brain can monitor decisions it has made. It tells
itself: "I have chosen to follow this track in the forest and it's turning out to be a sunlit pathway/sodden jungle", but it registers no more
nuanced reaction than that. What this newly discovered region does, however, is to identify other paths that it might have been better to take, and
register what a dolt the brain feels for getting it wrong.

"This region monitors how good the choices are that we don't take," said Professor Matthew Rushworth, who led the research, "How green the grass is on
the other side."

Both Hannibal Lecter and Dalai Lama can do this. They just choose to score the value of the 'counterfactual' differently.

Dr Lecter might use his brussel sprout to hypothetically consider, "hmm, I suppose I could have continued a nice friendship" but then decide "nah, I
enjoyed having him for dinner just too much".

The popularized article attached the "conscience" to the scientific result, not the original scientists. I believe this to be an error.

A conscience is your evaluation process before doing something, considering the value and importance of the consequences, in particular to people
other than yourself.

This result is about is recognition of planning mistakes for the purpose of learning.

It's not clear whether this study is claiming to have found the part of our brain which allows us to have a sense of morality (a conscience) or if
they have found the part of the brain which allows us to experience self awareness (a consciousness). It seems like they are blurring the two concept
together, and I don't think that is a valid way to go about it. There probably isn't one single part of the brain you can point to and say "this is
what makes us self aware", it's far more likely that all parts of the brain work together to form a highly complex network from which consciousness
emerges. Of course you can remove some parts of the brain and the person will still remain conscious, but if you remove too much of any part of the
brain the person will not remain conscious.

ChaoticOrder
There probably isn't one single part of the brain you can point to and say "this is what makes us self aware", it's far more likely that all parts of
the brain work together to form a highly complex network from which consciousness emerges.

While all parts work together, we have known for a long time that each area
has unique functions, so yes this actually shows by way of MRI the specific area that is used.

The combination of scans allowed the scientists to work out in exquisite
detail how each part of the ventrolateral frontal cortex (vlFC), a region crucial
for language and cognitive flexibility, was connected with any other part of the
brain. From this, they identified 12 distinct areas of the vlFC that worked in different ways.

The brain is a mosaic of interlinked areas. We wanted to look at this very important region
of the frontal part of the brain and see how many tiles there are and where they are placed.

"We also looked at the connections of each tile – how they are wired up to the rest of the
brain – as it is these connections that determine the information that can reach that component
part and the influence that part can have on other brain regions."

Franz-Xaver Neubert, said, "We have established an area in human frontal cortex which does not seem to have an equivalent in the monkey at all.

burntheships
That part I really like. I guess Return of the Planet of the Apes will remain a
work of fiction, without a doubt.

Planet of the Apes was pretty far fetched and I'm pretty sure you were joking, but apes (superfamily
Hominoidea) are already more advanced than monkeys (superfamily
Cercopithecidae), and in fact some of them use tools to hunt, kill, and eat monkeys, which
one might argue is even worse than just enslaving other primates like the fictional evolved apes did with humans.

The source says they didn't find anything similar in monkey brains. It doesn't mention anything about looking in ape brains, so if they didn't
look, maybe we don't know if apes have a region similar to humans or not?

The source says they didn't find anything similar in monkey brains. It doesn't mention anything about looking in ape brains, so if they didn't
look, maybe we don't know if apes have a region similar to humans or not?

My point is, I think there are enough differences that we can't draw conclusions about apes by looking at monkeys, especially when we already know
about a lot of differences in diet, behavior, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if the apes had areas in their brain that monkeys lacked.

While all parts work together, we have known for a long time that each area has unique functions,
so yes this actually shows by way of MRI the area that is used.

Yes, but what they have shown is an area of the brain which gives us a conscience. I'm saying we must keep in mind that there is a difference between
a person with a "conscience" and person who is "conscious". Is it really so amazing that they were able to find a part of the brain which helps us
determine what is "right" and "wrong"? I would argue that my dog or cat has a sense of what is right and wrong.

And yes, I would agree that every dog and cat I have had exhibited a knowledge
of some sort....allowed actions as opposed to say...peeing on the carpet...lol.

Yep, although I've had people say that Max is just sensing my disapproval and acting in an appeasing manner to keep me from disciplining him (which
is usually just The Voice Of Shame), in truth I generally find out that he's done something bad when he comes to me with the guilty act.

He'll walk up, put his ears back, and squat down with his tail tucked, and he'll look away. "What did you do, Max?" and it's slink slink slink to
the scene of the crime, where he squats down again. It's tough not to believe that he knows he wasn't supposed to pee in my shoe, or jump up on the
chair then to the table and get in some food, or turn his water over and roll in it or whatever he's done this time.

He has learned that if he 'fesses up to the deed fast enough, he won't get the Voice of Shame or worse, put outside in the garage for an hour.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.